Solar Energy

[Masark]

(250W/m^2*148,940,000,000m^2)*3600

I'm getting 1.34x10^17.

Which is 1/350,000th of the 2008 energy consumption total.

You accidentally the math brah.

There are 1,000,000 square meters in a square kilometer, not 1000. You appear to have accidentally the metric system brah.

(250 W/m^2)*(148,940,000,000,000 m^2)*1 hour = 1.34046 × 10^20 Joules

Compared to 4.74 X 10^20 Joules yearly energy consumption.

28% of the world energy consumption in that one hour.

that number is still not usable though since we need a rather large amount of it for photosynthesis so we can keep on having oxygen to breathe.

Yes, but my point is I'm sure we can utilize 0.04% of the energy available without adverse effect.

[Frah]

Actually, he's fairly close.

250 W/m^2 (mean solar isolation on the Earth's surface. The 1366W figure commonly cited is at the top of the atmosphere) times 148,940,000 km^2 (area of the earth) times 1 hour equals approximately 1.34*10^20 Joules.

So we get enough energy from the sun to run civilization for a year every 3.5 hours, not every hour.

Few mistakes.
1st is the sun only hits half the earth at any given time so you need to take half the surface area.
The 2nd problem you made was you take the land surface area which isnt the entire surface area of the earth.

Using your values for solar energy reachign the earth. (which at a glance doesnt look wonkey)
Half the earths surface area is 255,600,981 km^2
total energy in an hour 2.3*10^20 J

Half the earths land surface area is 74,470,000 km^2
total energy in an hour 0.67*10^20 J

apparently
5.0x10^20 J is the total world annual energy consumption in 2010

Neither of the esstimates reach the consumption in 2010. :P

[Mister K]

GOOD NEWS EVERYONE

Rawlemon’s Spherical Solar Energy-Generating Globes Can Even Harvest Energy from Moonlight

The solar energy designers at Rawlemon have created a spherical, sun-tracking glass globe that is able to concentrate sunlight (and moonlight) up to 10,000 times. The company claims that its ß.torics system is 35% more efficient than traditional dual-axis photovoltaic designs, and the fully rotational, weatherproof sphere is even capable of harvesting electricity from moonlight.
The ß.torics system was invented by Barcelona-based German Architect André Broessel. He sought to create a solar system that could be embedded in the walls of buildings so that they may act as both windows and energy generators. But the project isn’t only noteworthy for its solar efficiency capabilities - the ß.torics system is designed to generate lunar energy too!
The spheres are able to concentrate diffused moonlight into a steady source of energy. The futuristic ß.torics system is catching a lot of attention for its clean and beautiful design. (Despite solar power’s huge potential, we haven’t seen too many beautiful solar power technologies). We’re excited to see how architects will incorporate these energy generating orbs into alternative energy agendas and future building designs!

Source : http://www.zeitnews.org/applied-scie...arvest-energy-

[Masark]

Few mistakes.
1st is the sun only hits half the earth at any given time so you need to take half the surface area.
The 2nd problem you made was you take the land surface area which isnt the entire surface area of the earth.

1. my figure accounts for that. it's the global mean isolation of the entire surface, which includes half being night.

2. Thought I was using the full area. Must've copied the wrong number.

Using the right earth area figure, i get 4.59*10^20 joules in one hour.

[Frah]

1. my figure accounts for that. it's the global mean isolation of the entire surface, which includes half being night.

2. Thought I was using the full area. Must've copied the wrong number.

Using the right earth area figure, i get 4.59*10^20 joules in one hour.

Fair enough on 1 didnt check to see where you were getting the number from.

just double the numbers i gave before then :P

Energy for all
total energy in an hour 4.6*10^20 J

Energy for land only land
total energy in an hour 1.3*10^20 J

Still both shy of the 5.0x10^20 J used in 2010 thus we can be confident its not quite enough for 2012 given energy consumption has been on the rise since 1860. So there is not enough energy hitting the earth in 1 hour to power humans needs for a year! Does this mean we can close the thread on virtue of the question being wrong? :P

[konstant]

yes, i agree with you, Current solar panels are not up to the mark and very inefficient. Why don't you order solar panel made by USA and China. solar panels of us /china are very effective and generate more energy and very effective.

[Reeve]

Exactly. So why aren't they more efficient when other areas of technology have improved dramatically. We have a super computer with over a million CPUs and 96,000 terabytes of memory and we're still using internal combustion engines. As a semaphore stated, it seems to be an issue of money. If every home had a super-efficient solar array, the only cost for energy would be a one time investment in the array and subsequent repairs down the line. I feel that oil companies want to milk every last dollar out of th world's oil supply.

Oil companies have relatively little to do with the electricity for your house. 1% of electricity in the US comes from oil and approximately 24% from Natural Gas. The majority comes from coal and nuclear.

[Deleted]

GOOD NEWS EVERYONE

Rawlemon’s Spherical Solar Energy-Generating Globes Can Even Harvest Energy from Moonlight





Source : http://www.zeitnews.org/applied-scie...arvest-energy-

That actually sounds interesting, hope something will come of it.

[Deleted]

Solar energy is rather weak and pointless inside the earth's atmosphere, unless you'd like to cover the entire planet in it.
Placing solar panels in outer space is much more efficient, although we would need a way to send that energy back to earth.

Also, sure we might be able to use solar energy in some cases. But it will never be the number one option since even in space it's weak compared to nuclear fusion. Why would we choose to tap power from the sun indirectly when we can recreate the process entirely, taking the energy right from the source?

Nuclear fusion is essentially what the sun is doing itself. So it would be like recreating it and it would be a much more effective source of energy. That's why I don't see the point in solar panels.

[Adam Jensen]

Solar energy is great the only problem I can think of is the amount of room it takes -- solar plants/fields are huge!

Put it on rooftops. Incorporate it with city structures rather than having a solar panel field.

---------- Post added 2012-12-03 at 01:18 PM ----------

The main problem is that current solar panels are very inefficient, they can only make use of less than 8% of the solar energy that hits them currently or even less if I understand it right.
If enough research is put to invent better solar panels tho and efficency get up to closer 20-25% in the future they might be more efficient than wind power. But today solar panels is just a waste of space and money, they are way too inefficient.

Then instead of continuing down the path of our destruction (read: being addicted to our oil supply) then perhaps we should start investing in solar energy research to make it more efficient.

We're in for a world of trouble, and probably another war, in a few decades when the oil wells begin to run dry and the only way to avoid this is to get off of oil before time is up.

[bumrush]

Well perhaps gold conductive pipes would get the power out better than just regular fiber cabling.

(jk. OT - I would love to find a way to make storage and transport of energy without much loss possible, but it would take so much investing that people would rather not do that)

Yes, but MFSUs are too expensive to implement.

[Reeve]

Solar energy is rather weak and pointless inside the earth's atmosphere, unless you'd like to cover the entire planet in it.
Placing solar panels in outer space is much more efficient, although we would need a way to send that energy back to earth.

Also, sure we might be able to use solar energy in some cases. But it will never be the number one option since even in space it's weak compared to nuclear fusion. Why would we choose to tap power from the sun indirectly when we can recreate the process entirely, taking the energy right from the source?

Nuclear fusion is essentially what the sun is doing itself. So it would be like recreating it and it would be a much more effective source of energy. That's why I don't see the point in solar panels.

We do recreate the processes of the sun on Earth. It's called the Hydrogen Bomb. Unfortunately, we don't have a good way to make a controlled version of that in a positive net-energy scenario yet. I'm hopeful we'll figure that out over the next 20 years or so.

[larrakeyah]

We're in for a world of trouble, and probably another war, in a few decades when the oil wells begin to run dry and the only way to avoid this is to get off of oil before time is up.

No man no, peak oil is a scam, we are not running out of oil, my father and one of my brothers are mining engineers and worked/works for major oil companies, they know their stuff, when asked about peak oil my father always relates the story of a professor claiming (in the 60s) oil would run out in the 80s and exactly the same thing happened to my brother in the late 90s, but the endtime was around 2010 this time lol. Prophets of doom always have and always will exist. People need to think critically. Even Spain has found oil bro.